Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 29th Sep 2007 21:24 UTC, submitted by Kishe
GNU, GPL, Open Source "A research firm serving the mobile phone industry has published an 18-page whitepaper about open source licensing. Entitled 'GPLv2 vs. GPLv3', the paper examines the meteoric rise of open source software, and the forces that shaped each license, before concluding with an extremely detailed point-by-point comparison."
Permalink for comment 275706
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE BSD license.
by pinky on Tue 2nd Oct 2007 14:08 UTC in reply to "RE BSD license."
pinky
Member since:
2005-07-15

>That's a huge barrier to code sharing. A one-way barrier, though, for the most part, since great care has been taken by the GPLvX authors to ensure what they term "compatibility" with other FOSS licenses.

GPL compatibility is not a special compatibility it's the very normal compatibility we know from any other area.

Compatible means that you can mix code. You can mix BSDL and GPL code, you can mix Apache-License and GPLv3 code, etc.

There is absolutely no technical or legal barrier. Maybe there is a personal barrier if an author of BSD code don't want to combine his code with GPL code. But than this is his personal decision and not a barrier of the GPL or any strange definition of compatibility.

What you mean is that you can't relicense GPL code. But that's relicensing and not compatibility.

Relicensing is not possible but compatibility (especially for GPLv3) is quite good.

Reply Parent Score: 4